Betty Dodson with Carlin Ross

Better Orgasms. Better World.

 0 items

• Login
• Join

Search this site:

Chrisonline,

Thankyou for your kind comments. I agree that laws which allocate a selective application of rights are nearly always a bad idea and should only be established around distinctions that apply universally. For example, laws and penalties for minors differ from the laws and penalties for adults and consequently the ages of criminal responsibility become a topic of hot debate.

Freedom is thus always relative to social values. But, while, from the Atheists' and Secularists' perspectives, all religious behaviour is categorised as belonging to the same universal dipositions to tribalism, there are many religious people who believe that their particular religion (or faith-based political system) represents the 'real' universal truth and thus all other religions are somehow deviant.

It's a peculiar situation; the religious 'right wings' of all hues call for the freedoms of other faiths to be curtailed while the 'left wing' humanists call for greater secularism.

As an Atheist I'm not keen on any religious clothing but there are more important issues at stake.

Reproduced from my blog:

A secular state must protect the rights of citizens to free expression; once the door has been opened for the state to decide what we wear, our basic freedoms of expression and association are curtailed.

Here in the UK, many people are calling for the same unjust legislation, often fuelled by islamaphobia and racism. Clearly, the decision of the French government plays into the hands of the far-right fascist movements in France and elsewhere.

As an Atheist and secular humanist, I’m most concerned that each person should have the freedom to develop their intellectual abilities, cultures and ideas: those we disagree with are open to our public censure under the same freedoms and human rights legislation that, on the whole, strikes the right balance. I am thus as much against those forces that might insist on religious garments as I am against those who would ban them.

The argument concerning ‘security’ is also mostly spurious as any disguise good enough to hide or change the face is as effective. The crazy argument that suicide bombers won’t be recognized is simply laughable; why would they wish not to be recognized? The costs of having extra women staff to check IDs at ports and airports? What about the costs of taking women to court and policing the ban?

In addition to my ethical and political objections to the ban, there are considerable practical points too; one example might be how one deals with elderly burka wearers.

Consider an older single woman living alone, perhaps in her 60s, 70s or 80s, who has never appeared in public without wearing her burka. Is she expected to suddenly change her habits of a life time and feel almost naked in the street? The chances are she will not go out and have to arrange for all her shopping and to be done for her. Her social life will have to take place at home and she might become so isolated that her life becomes unbearable, never mind the threats to her physical health; lack of exercise, not shopping regularly for fresh food and so on – it is forced disablement.

As for the supposed ‘right’ to see people’s faces and the idea that seeing the face is somehow crucial to communication and recognition – what rubbish. Blind people can have excellent and fulfilling relationships like the rest of us. If we are sighted, we can recognise the Burka wearing woman (if she is a close friend) pretty instantly by body language, style, gait, voice, height and weight and so-on. If she is not a close friend then seeing her face is not at all important anyway.  

The sense of outrage displayed by those in favour of the ban seems to me to be misplaced at best and, at worst, just another way of undermining women.

If you wish to provide support for those against the ban, there are Facebook pages and the site started by Rachid Nekkaz. I think support from Atheists might carry some weight as many think it is only Muslims who object.

I’m at a loss to understand the perspective that in France, or other secular countries, women are mostly coerced into wearing a full veil. While I don’t know of any statistical analysis, I have previously lived in an area with a very high Islamic population for 7 years and when meeting staff at the Islamic drop-in centre (on environmental business) I was as likely to be greeted by the receptionist wearing a burka as wearing jeans and a T shirt – the same woman incidentally. The majority of Muslim women I worked with were indistinguishable from their non-Muslim colleagues and some often chose to wear either a veil or a full Burka when not at work outside the home. This freedom to mix and match is extremely common in other areas I know well with high Islamic populations. Undoubtedly there are cases of coercion in secular countries but the Muslims I have known have come to the west to escape coercion elsewhere as well as for economic reasons.

As for the repeated arguments supposedly in favour of women’s rights, I can only say that it is already illegal for adults to coerce other adults in to doing anything (unless they are the police or equivalent) and laws regarding domestic violence should be upheld. Fining a man a paltry sum for coercing a woman to wear what he chooses, in cases where that happens, undermines existing laws. What about the man who coerces his spouse or partner to wear a bikini in public under threat of violence? Are we to fine him a paltry sum instead of prosecuting him for intimidation with threats of violence?

Finally, if the French state, or any other, wishes to make serious improvements in the lives of coerced women perhaps it might be better to put greater effort into enforcing the existing laws designed to protect women from domestic violence; there’s hardly a lack of evidence for those crimes amongst non Muslims. As Tracy Chapman sang, “last night I heard the screaming, loud voices behind the wall, it doesn’t do no good at all, to call, the police, they always come late if they come at all.”

Lets get our priorities right.

Nick Nakorn.

Will nuns be next?

best wishes

Nick

http://nicknakorn.wordpress.com

Yesterday, on the subway, there were two little girls who showed me why the burqa should be banned. 

The "white" girl was spinning around the subway poll as all kids do.  The other "muslim" girl was watching intently.  The two girls definitely wanted to play and locked eyes immediately. 

Then I looked over and caught the mother of the "muslim" girl - she was in a full black burqa. Just as the girls were about to engage the "white" girl looked up and, at the site of the burqa, ran to her mother's side.  I felt awful for this muslim mother - she tried to talk to the girl to calm her but it only made things worse. 

The look of horror and misunderstanding on that little girl's face said it all.  It is shocking to see a woman's face completely covered. 

The justification for the burqa is that a woman's beauty can cause a man to lust so she must be covered.  Therein lies the evil.  Blaming women for sexual arousal is like blaming natural disasters on poor church attendance (fuck you, Pat Robertson & your ignorant comments about hurricane katrina). 

The individual must be responsible for their own behavior.

"I see my body as an instrument, rather than an ornament." - Alanis Morissette

when you first meet someone, you need to gage intent, are they friend or foe?...this has been a basic survival need since the caveman seeing the stranger coming up over the hill.  Any garb covering the face prevents us from making this basic decision-making process, a primary survival mechanism...you have to then instinctually judge the burqa as foe...it naturally seperates a person into the category of "other".

so as a public safety issue, the law should be no face coverings period, man or woman in public spaces...what you do in your own home is your business but if I can't make a determination that you are friend or foe, you are putting my societal safety at risk...some countries like Italy already have similar laws on the books predating our current burqa obsession...

women's fashions are always driven by societal preferences and standards and even tho I personally view the burqa as abhorrent to women's sovereignty...I find no real faminist arguement to restrict those silly brain-washed women who insist that it's their decicion, their right...but if you have one, let me know!!

btw, I have worn a burqa, our bookclub rented one during our reading of the Hosseini's "A Thousand Splendid Suns" and I find it quite claustrophobic, how any woman can be comfortable in one is beyond my comprehension.